A non-functioning S-meter? (how did that get past QC?) Lack of a noise blanker? Poor AM BCB and LW reception? This thing is coming up way short in "softball" tests served up by some product-friendly non-techie SWLs.

In the interest of keeping things in context, the "It's actually kind of embarrassing." was in reference to a AM MW reception comparison between the CR-1 with a "scanner whip", and a Sony 7600GR, which has a built-in ferrite bar antenna for MW and Longwave. Not the same.

This is why many times we find that these arguably juvenile youtube and swl forum "tests" and "reviews" are really not indicative of performance, but simply are an outlet for the meanderings of tyros.

A more accurate review might have had both radios simultaneously connected to the same loop antenna through a distribution amplifier for true side by side comparison.

Initially reported problems are so pervasive that one wonders how this $500/$650 receiver is being tested before shipment. Low audio on HF and an S-meter that sits around S9 are instantly apparent even to SWL buyers.

That video is interesting because it covers core ham frequencies, 7-21 MHz. Overload isn't a problem perhaps because that radio is using a discone antenna designed for higher frequencies. S-meter still doesn't work. Around 03:20 the video reveals loud pops with tuning. We hear an exceptionally loud pop at 05:07 when the mode switches from USB to CW.

Notice that the operator keeps his other hand or at least a few extra fingers on the tiny radio to stabilize it as he tunes.

My main question remains how well the CR-1 covers its full advertised range: 150 kHz to 468 MHz. How about UHF police/fire or VHF airport traffic, or hams on 2-meters? I'd still like to hear how it performs on longwave NDBs or hams on 475 kHz, or Euro longwave AM broadcasting around 162 kHz.

"having to hold down a flyweight radio would be a negative. I notice that one of the CR-1 buyers even said he was surprised how small it is"

"having" to hold down the flyweight radio would imply one is somehow forced to own it. Simple fix, don't buy it if it doesn't fit the requirement.

My point is, the form factor, i.e., dimensions, weight, design, would only be a negative if one were to buy it sight unseen and it turned out to be impractical for the imagined use case. This would be an unlikely situation unless the buyer is bereft of any sort of spatial cognizance, reading skills, ability to foresee a need and devise a plan, or formulate a cogent thought, or simply is prone to impulse buys and subsequent buyer's remorse.

The radio is clearly described on the website, which, incidentally is the only place whereby one might make the purchase. The website features photos and an accompanying video that visually demonstrates the size. Even if it had only a snapshot of the rear panel, one might extrapolate the relative cabinet size based only on the BNC connector.

Initially reported problems are so pervasive that one wonders how this $500/$650 receiver is being tested before shipment. Low audio on HF and an S-meter that sits around S9 are instantly apparent even to SWL buyers.

How many of these CommRadio toys are being sold at full price? Posts on RR have referred to beta testers (plural). The CR-1 may never emerge from beta testing even for those who paid $500. It didn't take long for the maker to back off on claims of longwave reception.

Reminds me of the early days of transistor radios. My family had a Bulova model, a tech marvel from about 1957. At $49.99 it was a costly purchase... tiny and sleek, and the batteries lasted many times longer than vacuum tube portables. It worked great by 1957 standards. When I took it apart years later I found that it used 4 transistors.

Radio makers competed with ever smaller models. I remember an article announcing a radio the size of a sugar cube.

Too bad sugar cube size speakers worked terribly. The public soon tired of micro-radios with their severe limitations. Result: Gigantic boomboxes, by the late 1960s.

Copyright 2000-2018 eHam.net, LLC
eHam.net is a community web site for amateur (ham) radio operators around the world.
Contact the site with comments or questions.
WEBMASTER@EHAM.NETSite Privacy Statement